A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm is a definitive Middle East strategy authored and implemented by operatives in the highest levels of the US government. There is just one problem. The plan was a strategy for Israel, not the United States of America.

The book reviews strategies and consequences of the “Clean Break” plan authored by Richard Perle, David Wurmser, and Douglas Feith in 1996. It analyzes the core assumptions of the policy, cost of tactics that have already been implemented and discusses the likelihood others will be executed in the future.

Neocon Middle East Policy then turns to the most difficult questions of all, “Can a policy crafted for a foreign government and presented to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu serve as a blueprint for US regional policy? At what cost in credibility, blood, treasure and American integrity? At what cost to Israel?” Neocon Middle East Policy is a must-read for anyone concerned about the convergence of US and Israeli foreign policy in the Middle East.
Contributors: Adam Shapiro, Dr. E. Faye Williams, Khaled Dawoud, Mohammed Kaddam. Edited by Grant F. Smith, Publication Date: April, 2005 ISBN # 0-9764437-3-2 Cover Price $9.95 Shipping Weight 9 Ounces, Paperback: 112 pages, Publisher: Institute for Research (March 1, 2005), ISBN-10: 0976443732, ISBN-13: 978-0976443735

IT SAYS:

The Israeli policy paper “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (ACB) Policy Initiatives (Source: Institute for Research Middle Eastern Policy, IRMEP 2003)Increase U.S. Congressional Support
1. “Electrify and find support” of key U.S. congressional members
2. Strategic cooperation with U.S. on missile defense
3. Gain more support among members of Congress with little knowledge of Israel
4. Harness support to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv
5. Identify Israel with the U.S. and “western values”
6. Utilize Cold War rhetoric to make Israel’s case to the American people“Peace for Peace” Palestinian Solution
1. Eliminate movements toward a “comprehensive peace” and substitute with the “Peace for Peace” strategy
2. Stress “balance of power” as sole test of legitimacy, enforce agreements
3. Nurture alternatives to Arafat
4. Seek legitimization of “hot pursuit” of Palestinian militants
5. Eliminate “land for peace” concept, use negotiations only as a forum for communicating resolve
6. Establish a joint monitoring committee with the U.S. for measuring Palestinian compliance
7. Withhold U.S. aid to Palestinians
8. Promote Human Rights among Arabs to isolate Palestinians in Arab Constituencies
9. Legitimize 2000 year old historical land claim
10. Foment Arab recognition of Israel in exchange for peace
Contain, Destabilize, and Roll Back Regional Challengers
1. Challenge Arab countries as “police states” lacking in legitimacy.
2. Fortify regional alliances. Work with Turkey and Jordan to insert hostile Arab tribes into SyriaSyria
1. Publicly question Syrian legitimacy, assume treaties with Damascus are in bad faith
2. Contain Syria, strike select targets
3. Reject “land for peace” concept on the Golan HeightsIraq
1. Install a Hashemite monarchy in Iraq
2. Isolate and surround Syria with a friendly regime in IraqLebanon
1. Engage Syria, Iran and Iraq in Lebanon
2. “Wean” Lebanese Shiites from Iraq toward Jordan
Economic Reform
1. Eliminate Social Zionism from the economy.
2. Reform the overall economy, cut taxes
3. Show maturity and economic self reliance from the United States
4. Eliminate need for defense by U.S. military forces
5. Remove U.S. aid leverage over Israel
6. Relegislate a free trade zone, sell off public lands and enterprisesZionism
1. Rebuild Zionism, rejuvenate the national ideal
2. “Shape the regional environment” in favor of Israel, “transcend foes” rather than contain them
3. Pre-emption as the preferred national defense strategy
Although ACB readers can identify nearly 34 distinct and actionable goals eloquently stated within the document, they may be summarized in five overarching policy goals:
1. Increase U.S. Congressional Support
2. “Peace for Peace” Palestinian Strategy
3. Contain, Destabilize, and Roll Back Regional Challengers
4. Economic Reform
5. Rejuvenation of Zionism

In this paper, we evaluate the level of implementation of these five summary goals, and their effect on the interests of the United States. However, no set of policies ever come to fruition without an active and vocal distribution and implementation network. ACB’s legions of American shock troops are many. At its core, key operatives working within the Bush Administration (called the Neocons), policy research “think tanks”, specialty press, and opinion columns have achieved amazing success at seasoning and baking ACB policy agenda items into a tenuous mold as “vital interests” of the United States itself.
The need for “crime scene” levels of evidence linking ACB followers’ complicity in the actions of the U.S. Government at Israel’s behest is unnecessary. Many U.S. actions are simply so inexplicable that consideration of their chief benefactor, Israel, is the only reasonable explanation. And as Americans dismiss Arab government charges that Israel is attacking them by proxy across the region, the evidence shows that the Arabs are correct. “A Clean Break” is, at heart, an Israeli proclamation of “Dirty War”.

Read the full Executive Summary of Institute for Research Middle Eastern Policy, Inc., on The Israeli policy paper “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (ACB) at this link

Like this:

The civil war by ISIS in Syria and Iraq is a joint planned project between Israel; Turkey and Jordan, called “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm“.

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the “Clean Break” report) is a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel. The report explained a new approach to solving Israel’s security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on “Western values.” It has since been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and the containment of Syria by engaging in proxy warfare and highlighting its possession of “weapons of mass destruction”. The polices set forth in the paper were rejected by Netanyahu.

“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” states the following:
[To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:
Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, “comprehensive peace” to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.

Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self-defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.
Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.

This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make.]
To download a pdf copy of the “Clean Break” full report click on here

Like this:

I propose to all entrepreneurs a new design for tower desktop; called “Top-Tower form”, (T.T.). The end product shall have all the performance of a versatile, upgradeable, powerful and affordable desktop together with many features of a compact laptop.

It is very efficient, practical, economical and attractive. It shall solve many issues at once and will become the best alternative to conventional desktop and laptop in business and personal uses.

Since all desktops are now using slim monitors (LCD or Plasma) then there is a chance to have a design whereby the monitor could be integrated and forms a removable part of tower case.

Not like Apple’s iMac computer models released from 2004, and other All-in-One designs, where all PC components are integrated behind a LCD screen. The new design shall do the opposite; by mounting a changeable slim monitor to one side of full-,mid- or mini-tower with a top handle.

The monitor shall act as a slightly tilting side cover to the case, or the case shall have a trapezoidal x-section. All the components of the front panel may be moved below the monitor which will transform the side panel to become the new front panel. You can make the conventional PSU slimmer and/or just fix it vertically to reduce case depth.

You can initiate a standard trend whereby new tower cases shall have the monitor as a customizable integral part. A separate fold-able or detachable keyboard with an additional touch pad may be added as optional, or just keep a conventional mouse.

Also, you can add a single-leaf or two-leaf sliding or hinged cover to the monitor; plus a single Y-shaped power cord.

An alternative to this design is to make the monitor fixed on adjustable mounts on the left- side of ordinary case. Both designs can be applied with the second as modification for the present models of tower cases.

Hard disks; expansion cards; and optical drives shall be mounted and ejected just from outside of the new front panel below the monitor without opening the case, with the same mechanism used with optical drives in laptops.

I expect these designs will be very attractive and useful for the majority of computer owners who cannot afford to buy a laptop or prefer using a desktop.

The new designs have the following features:
1- occupy less space;
2-shorter cables;
3- changeable monitor;
4- compact and portable;
5- maintain component flexibility;
6- lesser materials and total weight and
7- less expensive in transport and upgrading.
It can go together with manufacturing conventional Desktop Tower Cases.

Major companies realized that the conventional tower desktop needs new design to solve a number of important difficulties. So they came up with the AIO monitor concept but the concept behind the design was based on integrating the case components into the back of the monitor. By doing so, they sacrificed important elements as of upgradability and AIO became only a immobile laptop. It failed.

Now computer manufacturers reversed the concept of AIO monitor and integrated the monitor onto the desktop tower case to create AIO case; but did not solve the issues of expansion cards, monitor positioning and the access to the motherboard. This failed also.

I did not try to improve the AIO case but my design is independent fresh approach. My design offers a number of important advantages to the monitor, motherboard, hard disks, expansion cards, upgradability, maintenance, keyboard, weight, aesthetics and cost.

I am posting to hear form someone interested in manufacturing this deign under patent license.

Important Note:

This week, I conflicted with a British person who describes himself as “one of the most respected IT lecturers in Europe” who runs a Facebook group for Computer Enthusiasts. I posted my design on that Facebook group page and the reaction was high with a lot of vulgar language, abuse and nonsense. Normally, a useless topic do not attract any attention or discussion.

The “respected IT lecturer” sided with his crap and revoked my membership citing I was hostile and offending. I feel their wicked intentions to rubbish my design and steal it.
I challenged him to prove and publish in public my design and those he claims that they are the same and were made before mine.

Later the “respected” person send me the following photo and web address. He said it been done over and over, it never sold since 2009.

Radius PC Gives New Meaning to All-in-One Computers

Well as you can see there are many basic differences and my design has a lot of advantages than that one. The “respected” IT lecturer couldn’t see or admit that; and in a rude manner he and his group ridiculed and accused me of copying that design. Then he said I only made developments to te one already existed in 2009.

The design I made came from my personal experience and my need to solve practical problems with the conventional desktop. It is genuinely mine and it was not inspired by any other design and it is different from many important aspects.

It is amazing to me that a “respected IT lecturer” and his group could not solve the problems of conventional desktop; and then describe my design as stupid minor changes to the design of 2009 which in his own words “it been done over and over, it never sold since 2009”!

(Six of this useless dumb indecent group and “respected IT lecturer” voted to this design giving it 1 out of 5 i.e. very poor LOL!!!)

Like this:

Stereotyping Hitler and Nazi as racists and cruel is still very effective easy weapon for Western media and modern history writers with Jewish international capitalism directives. The truth of Nazi ans Hitler are not in allegations of Aryan supremacy but in their economic program and policies since 1920’s. Germany and Hitler and Nazi did go to WWI and WWII to defend their national economy and security and not for insane racism. The Jews succeeded in portraying German nationalism as racism.

The plotted fall of tsarist Russia to the criminal Jewish communist Bolsheviks with capitalist funding was final evidence to nationalist Germans that they cannot ignore and sit like a duck. International Jewish banks hated Tsar Nicholas II and plotted against him because he was a smart free nationalist and he refused usury. The plot started by giving debts to Japan to kill two birds with one stone by encouraging Japan to go to war against Tsarist Russia to exhaust its economy.

Then the Tsar made the biggest mistake of siding against Germany and Austria in WWI because of the Balkan. These two events bankrupted Russia and the International Jewish banks took advantage and designed, trained and funded the Jewish Bolshevik and some disgruntled unfit Russians to topple the Tsar and establish a chaotic violent republic under their capital influence. The Russian nationalists were aware of that and that brought the Russian civil war which the Jewish Bolshevik fought the nationalist Russian who were defeated and eliminated.

Hitler and Nazi could not forget or ignore such crimes not only in Russia and Germany but also in France and the UK. Hitler and Nazi fought for Europeans against corrupt European regimes and businesses.

Who financed Lenin and Trotsky and the Bolsheviks?
One of the greatest myths of contemporary history is that the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a popular uprising of the downtrodden masses against the hated ruling class of the Tsars. However, the planning, the leadership and especially the financing came entirely from outside Russia, mostly from financiers in Germany, Britain and the United States.

There are many good reasons to believe that Hitler and Nazism were great and good. Among these reasons is that the war against Russia was meant to save the innocent and nationalist Russians and all Europe from the rule of criminal international banking mafia. Many people especially in the EU states will be very much sorry to discover the truth after decades of being deceived by the media of the same criminal international banking mafia.

Like this:

(International Jewry Capitalism and Communist USSR)165-page Book written By Antony C. Sutton March in 1974

Since the early 1920s, numerous pamphlets and articles, even a few books, have sought to forge a link between “international bankers” and “Bolshevik revolutionaries.” Rarely have these attempts been supported by hard evidence, and never have such attempts been argued within the framework of a scientific methodology. Indeed, some of the “evidence” used in these efforts has been fraudulent, some has been irrelevant, and much cannot be checked. Examination of the topic by academic writers has been studiously avoided; probably because the hypothesis offends the neat dichotomy of capitalists versus Communists (and everyone knows, of course, that these are bitter enemies). Moreover, because a great deal that has been written borders on the absurd, a sound academic reputation could easily be wrecked on the shoals of ridicule. Reason enough to avoid the topic.
Fortunately, the State Department Decimal File, particularly the 861.00 section, contains extensive documentation on the hypothesized link. When the evidence in these official papers is merged with nonofficial evidence from biographies, personal papers, and conventional histories, a truly fascinating story emerges.
We find there was a link between some New York international bankers and many revolutionaries, including Bolsheviks. These banking gentlemen — who are here identified — had a financial stake in, and were rooting for, the success of the Bolshevik Revolution.
Who, why — and for how much — is the story in this book.
Antony C. Sutton

Chapter II: Trotsky Leaves New York to Complete the Revolution
Woodrow Wilson and a Passport for Trotsky
Canadian Government Documents on Trotsky’s Release
Canadian Military Intelligence Views Trotsky
Trotsky’s Intentions and Objectives

Chapter III: Lenin and German Assistance for the Bolshevik Revolution
The Sisson Documents
The Tug-of-War in Washington

Chapter IV: Wall Street and the World Revolution
American Bankers and Tsarist Loans
Olof Aschberg in New York, 1916
Olof Aschberg in the Bolshevik Revolution
Nya Banken and Guaranty Trust Join Ruskombank
Guaranty Trust and German Espionage in the United States, 1914-1917
The Guaranty Trust-Minotto-Caillaux Threads

Chapter VI: Consolidation and Export of the Revolution
A Consultation with Lloyd George
Thompson’s Intentions and Objectives
Thompson Returns to the United States
The Unofficial Ambassadors: Robins, Lockhart, and Sadoul
Exporting the Revolution: Jacob H. Rubin
Exporting the Revolution: Robert Minor

Chapter VII: The Bolsheviks Return to New York
A Raid on the Soviet Bureau in New York
Corporate Allies for the Soviet Bureau
European Bankers Aid the Bolsheviks

Chapter VIII: 120 Broadway, New York City
American International Corporation
The Influence of American International on the Revolution
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York
American-Russian Industrial Syndicate Inc.
John Reed: Establishment Revolutionary
John Reed and the MetropolitanMagazine

Chapter IX: Guaranty Trust Goes to Russia
Wall Street Comes to the Aid of Professor Lomonossoff
The Stage Is Set for Commercial Exploitation of Russia
Germany and the United States Struggle for Russian Business
Soviet Gold and American Banks
Max May of Guaranty Trust Becomes Director of Ruskombank

Chapter X: J.P. Morgan Gives a Little Help to the Other Side
United Americans Formed to Fight Communism
United Americans Reveals “Startling Disclosures” on Reds
Conclusions Concerning United Americans
Morgan and Rockefeller Aid Kolchak

Chapter XI: The Alliance of Bankers and Revolution
The Evidence Presented: A Synopsis
The Explanation for the Unholy Alliance
The Marburg Plan

Appendix I:
Directors of Major Banks,Firms, and Institutions Mentioned in This Book (as in 1917-1918)

Appendix II:
The Jewish-Conspiracy Theory of the Bolshevik Revolution

Appendix III:
Selected Documents from Government
Files of the United States and Great Britain

Like this:

Gottfried Feder (27 January 1883 – 24 September 1941) was a German economist and one of the early key members of the Nazi Party. He was their economic theoretician. Initially, it was his lecture in 1919 that drew Hitler into the party.

Feder was born in Würzburg, Germany on 27 January 1883 as the son of civil servant Hanse Feder and Mathilde Feder (née Luz). After attending humanistic schools in Ansbach and Munich, he studied engineering in Berlin and Zürich (Switzerland); after graduating, he founded a construction company in 1908 that subsequently was particularly active in Bulgaria where it built a number of official buildings.

From 1917 on, Feder studied financial politics and economics on his own; he developed a hostility towards wealthy bankers during World War I and wrote a “manifesto on breaking the shackles of interest” (“Brechung der Zinsknechtschaft”) in 1919. This was soon followed by the founding of a “task force” dedicated to those goals that demanded a nationalisation of all banks and an abolition of interest.

In the same year, Feder, together with Anton Drexler, Dietrich Eckart and Karl Harrer, was involved in the founding of the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (German Workers’ Party-DAP). Adolf Hitler met him in summer 1919 while he was in an anti-Bolshevik training course at Munich university—funded by the army and organized by Major Karl Mayr—and Feder became his mentor in finance and economics. He was the inspirer of Hitler’s opposition to “Jewish finance capitalism.” Delivering political courses alongside Feder was Karl Alexander von Müller (son of Bavaria’s Culture Minister) who spotted Hitler’s oratorical ability and forwarded his name as a political instructor for the army—an important step in Hitler’s career.

In February 1920, together with Adolf Hitler and Anton Drexler, Feder drafted the so-called “25 points” which summed up the party’s views, and introduced his own anti-capitalist views into the program. When the paper was announced on 24 February 1920, more than 2,000 people attended the rally. In an attempt to make the party more broadly appealing to larger segments of the population, the DAP was renamed in February 1920 to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers’ Party, NSDAP), more commonly known as the Nazi Party.

Feder took part in the party’s Beer Hall Putsch in November 1923. After Hitler’s arrest, he remained one of the leaders of the party and was elected to the Reichstag in 1924, where he stayed until 1936 and demanded the freezing of interest rates and dispossession of Jewish citizens. He remained one of the leaders of the anti-capitalistic wing of the NSDAP, and published several papers, including “National and social bases of the German state” (1920), “Das Programm der NSDAP und seine weltanschaulichen Grundlagen” (“The programme of the NSDAP and the world views it’s based on,” 1927) and “Was will Adolf Hitler?” (“What does Adolf Hitler want?”, 1931).

Feder briefly dominated the NSDAP’s official views on financial politics, but after he became chairman of the party’s economic council in 1931, his anti-capitalist views led to a great decline in financial support from Germany’s major industrialists. Following pressure from Walther Funk, Albert Voegler, Gustav Krupp, Friedrich Flick, Fritz Thyssen, Hjalmar Schacht and Emil Kirdorf, Hitler decided to move the party away from Feder’s economic views; when Hitler became Reichskanzler in 1933, he appointed Feder as under-secretary at the ministry of economics in July. This disappointed Feder, who had hoped for a much higher position.

Feder continued to write papers, putting out “Kampf gegen die Hochfinanz” (“The Fight against high finance”, 1933) and the anti-semitic “Die Juden” (“The Jews,” 1933); in 1934, he became Reichskommissar (Reich commissioner).

In 1939 he wrote Die Neue Stadt (the New City). This can be considered a Nazi attempt at Garden City building. Here he proposed creating agricultural cities of 20,000 people divided into nine autonomous units and surrounded by agricultural areas. Each city was to be fully autonomous and self-sufficient; detailed plans for daily living and urban amenities are taken into consideration. Unlike other garden city theorists, he believed that urban areas could be reformed by subdividing the existing built environment into self-sufficient neighborhoods. This idea of creating clusters of self-contained neighbourhoods forming a mid-sized city was popularised by Uzō Nishiyama in Japan. It would later be applied in the era of Japanese New Town construction.

However, despite its consistency with the blood and soil ideology of the Nazis, his concept of decentralized factories was successfully opposed by both generals and Junkers. Generals objected because it interfered with rearmament, and Junkers because it would prevent their exploiting their estates for the international market.

After the Night of the Long Knives in June 1934, where SA leaders like Ernst Röhm and left-leaning party officials like Gregor Strasser were liquidated, Feder began to withdraw from the government, finally becoming a professor at the Technische Hochschule in Berlin in December 1936, where he stayed until his death in Murnau on 24 September 1941.

Share this:

Like this:

The Soviet USSR has foreign roots and it did not come from Russia itself. The Bolsheviks damaged great peaceful harmony and many adorable gentle qualities of the Russians but it could not destroy them. Bolshevism and its perverted Communism succeeded in defaming and portray its ugly aggressive image upon Russia all over the World to majority of unaware persons. Bolshevik communist USSR does not resemble the Russian characters in many obvious ways. It is simply not Russian at all.

The so-called “Russian Revolution” of 1917 was designed and financed and managed by foreigners who hate Russia and its great history and heritage to destroy patriotism, create crises and steal wealth.
People can only either love Russia or not dislike Stalin and what he represents as Bolshevik communist USSR, but to admire both of them impossible is not only for Russian but also for people from all around the World.

The Bolsheviks were Khazarian Mafia revenge on the Russian Czar and the innocent Russian people. The words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn (Noble Laureant) support this opinion.

“What is the essential difference between (Oliver) Cromwell and (Joseph) Stalin? Can you tell me? No difference…(Cromwell’s) monument is standing, (and) no one is going to remove it. The essence is not in these symbols, but in the need to treat with respect every period of our history.” In the words of Russian President and leader Vladimir Putin. These words imply that the USSR was a shame but it is still part of the Russian history.

The Bolsheviks were actually created and deployed by the Khazarian Mafia (KM) as the essential part of their long planned revenge on the Russian Czar and the innocent Russian people for breaking up Khazaria in about 1,000 AD for its repeated robbery, murder and identity theft of travelers from countries surrounding Khazaria. This little known fact explains the extreme violence taken out on Russia as long standing revenge by the Rothschild controlled Khazarian Mafia (KM).

The collapse of USSR was a natural normal consequence of faulty foundation and leadership. Peter the Great (1672–1725); Catherine the Great (1762–1796); and the Romanovs are all extremely tall compared to Stalin. This is the real hero of Russia: Tsar Nicholas II, in the uniform of a Royal Navy Admiral of the Fleet, c. 1909.

In 1981, Nicholas and his immediate family were recognized as martyred saints by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia. On 14 August 2000, they were recognized by the synod of the Russian Orthodox Church. This time they were not named as martyrs, since their deaths did not result immediately from their Christian faith; instead, they were canonized as passion bearers. According to a statement by the Moscow synod, they were glorified as saints for the following reasons:
In the last Orthodox Russian monarch and members of his family we see people who sincerely strove to incarnate in their lives the commands of the Gospel. In the suffering borne by the Royal Family in prison with humility, patience, and meekness, and in their martyr deaths in Yekaterinburg in the night of 17 July 1918 was revealed the light of the faith of Christ that conquers evil.

Stalin

Stalin’s birth name in Georgian was Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili He was born an ethnic Georgian – Ioseb’s father slid into alcoholism, which made him abusive to his family and caused his business to fail. He was a voracious reader and became a Georgian cultural nationalist. Out of school, Jughashvili briefly worked as a part-time clerk in a meteorological office, but after a state crackdown on revolutionaries, he went underground and became a full-time revolutionary, living off donations. Among other activities, he wrote and distributed propaganda, organized strikes, and raised funds through bank robberies, kidnappings, extortion, and assassinations. Jughashvili was arrested and exiled to Siberia numerous times, but often escaped. His skill, charm, and street-smarts won him the respect of Lenin, and he rose rapidly through the ranks of the Bolsheviks. Just like Hitler, Stalin was picked up from nowhere and polished and he was errected by foreign financiers, without any merits other than brutality and street-smarts.

Stalin played an active role in fighting the Russian government. Here he is shown on a 1911 information card from the files of the Russian police in Saint Petersburg:

Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili or Joseph Stalin as he called himself

In the night of July 16-17, 1918, a squad of Bolshevik secret police murdered Russia’s last emperor,

Tsar Nicholas II, along with his wife, Tsaritsa Alexandra, their 14-year-old son, Tsarevich Alexis, and their four daughters. They were cut down in a hail of gunfire in a room of the house in Ekaterinburg, a city in the Ural mountain region, where they were being held prisoner.

The daughters were finished off with bayonets. To prevent a cult for the dead Tsar, the bodies were carted away to the countryside and hastily buried in a secret grave. Bolshevik authorities at first reported that the Romanov emperor had been shot after the discovery of a plot to liberate him.

For some time the deaths of the Empress and the children were kept secret. Soviet historians claimed for many years that local Bolsheviks had acted on their own in carrying out the killings, and that Lenin, founder of the Soviet state, had nothing to do with the crime.

In 1990, Moscow playwright and historian Edvard Radzinsky announced the result of his detailed investigation into the murders. He unearthed the reminiscences of Lenin’s bodyguard, Alexei Akimov, who recounted how he personally delivered Lenin’s execution order to the telegraph office. The telegram was also signed by Soviet government Chief Yakov Sverdlov. Akimov had saved the original telegraph tape as a record of the secret order.

Radzinsky’s research confirmed what earlier evidence had already indicated. Leon Trotsky — one of Lenin’s closest colleagues — had revealed years earlier that Lenin and Sverdlov had together made the decision to put the Tsar and his family to death.

The massacred Tsar Nicholas II family

In recent years, Jews around the world have been voicing anxious concern over the specter of anti-Semitism in the lands of the former Soviet Union. In this new and uncertain era, we are told, suppressed feelings of hatred and rage against Jews are once again being expressed. According to one public opinion survey conducted in 1991, for example, most Russians wanted all Jews to leave the country. But precisely why is anti-Jewish sentiment so widespread among the peoples of the former Soviet Union? Why do so many Russians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and others blame “the Jews” for so much misfortune?

Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country’s total population,5 they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied.

With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs. Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party’s executive secretary and — as chairman of the Central Executive Committee — head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky.

Lenin himself was of mostly Russian and Kalmuck ancestry, but he was also one-quarter Jewish. His maternal grandfather, Israel (Alexander) Blank, was a Ukrainian Jew who was later baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church.

A thorough-going internationalist, Lenin viewed ethnic or cultural loyalties with contempt. He had little regard for his own countrymen. “An intelligent Russian,” he once remarked, “is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood in his veins.”

Critical Meetings

In the Communist seizure of power in Russia, the Jewish role was probably critical.

Two weeks prior to the Bolshevik “October Revolution” of 1917, Lenin convened a top secret meeting in St. Petersburg (Petrograd) at which the key leaders of the Bolshevik party’s Central Committee made the fateful decision to seize power in a violent takeover. Of the twelve persons who took part in this decisive gathering, there were four Russians (including Lenin), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and six Jews.

To direct the takeover, a seven-man “Political Bureau” was chosen. It consisted of two Russians (Lenin and Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), and four Jews (Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Zinoviev, and Kamenev). Meanwhile, the Petersburg (Petrograd) Soviet — whose chairman was Trotsky — established an 18-member “Military Revolutionary Committee” to actually carry out the seizure of power. It included eight (or nine) Russians, one Ukrainian, one Pole, one Caucasian, and six Jews. Finally, to supervise the organization of the uprising, the Bolshevik Central Committee established a five-man “Revolutionary Military Center” as the Party’s operations command. It consisted of one Russian (Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and two Jews (Sverdlov and Uritsky).

Contemporary Voices of Warning

Well-informed observers, both inside and outside of Russia, took note at the time of the crucial Jewish role in Bolshevism. Winston Churchill, for one, warned in an article published in the February 8, 1920, issue of the London Illustrated Sunday Herald that Bolshevism is a “worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality.” The eminent British political leader and historian went on to write.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate, Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek — all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combatting Counter-Revolution [the Cheka] has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. David R. Francis, United States ambassador in Russia, warned in a January 1918 dispatch to Washington: “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.”

The Netherlands’ ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, made much the same point a few months later: “Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things.”

“The Bolshevik Revolution,” declared a leading American Jewish community paper in 1920, “was largely the product of Jewish thinking, Jewish discontent, Jewish effort to reconstruct.”

As an expression of its radically anti-nationalist character, the fledgling Soviet government issued a decree a few months after taking power that made anti-Semitism a crime in Russia. The new Communist regime thus became the first in the world to severely punish all expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment. Soviet officials apparently regarded such measures as indispensable. Based on careful observation during a lengthy stay in Russia, American-Jewish scholar Frank Golder reported in 1925 that “because so many of the Soviet leaders are Jews anti-Semitism is gaining [in Russia], particularly in the army [and] among the old and new intelligentsia who are being crowded for positions by the sons of Israel.”
Quoting from Mark Weber: The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Soviet Regime

Amongst themselves, the Jews are quite candid about their sympathy for and involvement in Bolshevism.

Jews and Bolshevism

On 4 April 1919 the Jewish Chronicle: “There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolshevists, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.” (Perhaps this explains why the Red Army uses a Jewish star as its symbol?)

Probably the best-known exposé of the Jewish role in the Bolshevik coup d’état was by Sir Winston Churchill, writing in the Illustrated Sunday Herald of 8 February 1920. Churchill wrote “With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of leading figures are Jews. Moreover the principal inspiration and the driving power comes from Jewish leaders.”

Communism was of course founded by Karl Marx whose grandfather was a rabbi by the name of Mordeccai. Marx was given his initial encouragement by a Communist-Zionist by the name of Moses Hess. As founder and editor of the Rheinische Zeitung, the main organ of leftist thought in Germany, he provided Karl Marx with his first important platform. Later, in Brussels, he collaborated with Marx on The German Ideology. It was Hess too who converted to Communism Friedrich Engels, the wealthy textiles magnate who later subsidised Marx from the profits of sweated labour in Britain and Germany.

When the Bolsheviks overthrew the short-lived democratic government in Moscow and St. Petersburg in October 1917, it was a virtual Jewish coup d’état. The most prominent Jewish Commissar was Trotsky, real name Bronstein. He had been married by a rabbi in 1900, and whilst in exile in New York he had worked for Novy Mir, described in the Church Times (23 January 1925) as a “Yiddish newspaper.”

The various reporters and diplomats who were there at the time of the “Revolution” have given evidence as to its Jewish nature. The widow of the Guardian’s correspondent Mrs. Ariadna Tyrkova-Williams wrote: “In the Soviet Republic all the committees and commissaries were filled with Jews.”

The most detailed description of Jewish influence in the Bolshevik ‘revolution comes from Robert Wilton, the Russian correspondent of The Times. In 1920 he published a book in French, Les Derniers Jours des Romanofs, which gave the racial background of all the members of the Soviet government. (This does not appear in the later English translation, for some odd reason.) After the publication of this monumental work, Wilton was ostracised by the press, and he died in poverty in 1925.

Although Lenin is described as a “Russian,” in fact he was a mixture of various nationalities. It is likely that he was one-quarter Russian, one-quarter German, one-quarter Jewish and at least one-quarter Kalmuck (Mongol), which accounts for his Mongol appearance. Various authorities allege that his wife, Nadezhda Krupskaya was a Jewess and that her family spoke Yiddish in the home.

A report sent to the British government in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke, the Dutch consul in St. Petersburg, said that “Bolshevism is organised and worked by Jews.” The report was included in a pamphlet published as a government White Paper in April 1919 entitled Russia No. 1 (1919) A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia. However, the pamphlet was quickly withdrawn and reissued with various excisions and alterations made.

In the War Records Division of the United States National Archives there is filed a report from an American Intelligence operative in St. Petersburg. Under Record Group 20; Records of the American Expeditionary Forces Capt. Montgomery Schuyler, G2 Intelligence wrote, “The Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest type.”

Also in the U.S. National Archives are two telegrams sent by American diplomats in Russia. State Department document 861.00/1757 sent on 2 May 1918 by U.S. Consul Summers in Moscow relates, “Jews predominant in local Soviet government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population.” Document 861.00/2205 from Consul Caldwell in Vladivostock on 5 July 1918 describes, “Fifty per cent of Soviet government in each town consists of Jews of worst type.”

In January, 1924, Lenin died from causes variously described as ‘a heart attack,’ brain hemorrhage’ and ‘syphilis.’ His comrades immediately began fighting amongst themselves to see who was to become his successor.

A relative outsider, Joseph Stalin, came to the fore and purged all competition either by exiling or executing them. Since Stalin was not Jewish, yet nearly all his opponents were, it is often suggested that Stalin was anti-Semitic. This is far from the truth.

Stalin had three wives, all of them Jewesses. The first was Ekaterina Svanidze who bore him one son, Jacob. His second wife was Kadya Allevijah. She bore him a son Vassili and a daughter Svetlana. His second wife died in mysterious circumstances, either by committing suicide or murdered by Stalin. His third wife was Rosa Kaganovich, the sister of Lazar Kaganovich, the head of Soviet industry. Stalin’s daughter (who in 1967 fled to the USA) then married Lazar’s son Mihail i.e. her step-mother’s nephew. Svetlana Stalin had a total of four husbands, three of them Jewish.

Stalin’s vice-president Molotov was also married to a Jewess, whose brother, Sam Karp, runs an export business in Connecticut. Just to complicate things even more, the Molotov’s (half-Jewish) daughter also called Svetlana was engaged to be married to Stalin’s son Vassili.

After the death of Stalin, his successors kept up the tradition, for a report in the B’nai B’rith Messenger relates: “To show that Russia treats its Jews well, Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev this week remarked at a reception at the Polish Embassy that not only he himself and Soviet President Klementi Voroshilov, but also half the members of the Praesidium have Jewish wives. Mr. Kruschev made this remark to Israeli Ambassador Joseph Avidar, who was amongst the guests.” (Kruschev’s wife was yet another Kaganovitch.)

According to a report in The Canadian Jewish News of 13 November 1964 the present Soviet boss Leonid Brezhnev is married to a Jewess, and his children are brought up as Jews. There are a number of prominent Jews in the Soviet government, including Dimitri Dymshits in charge of industry, Lev Shapiro regional secretary of Birobidjan, and Yuri Andropov in charge of the secret police, the KGB. In fact, every secret police chief in Soviet history has been a Jew, from the first Uritsky to the most recent, the murderous Beria. A Jew is also in charge of the Soviet economy – Leonid Kantorovich.

It is a well-known fact that the Bolsheviks were and are financed by Jewish interests in the West.

At a Bolshevik celebration rally in New York’s Carnegie Hall on the night of 23 March 1917, a telegram of support from Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. was read out. The telegram was reprinted in the next morning’s New York Times. Schiff later tried to deny his involvement, but thirty years later his grandson John admitted in the New York Journal-American (3 February 1949) that the old man had sunk twenty million dollars into the Bolshevik cause.

Another Western bankers who poured funds into Bolshevik Russia was Olaf Ashberg of the Stockholm Nia Banken. He remained the Soviets’ paymaster until the late 1940s. The London Evening Standard of 6 September 1948 reported a visit by Ashberg to Switzerland “for secret meetings with Swiss government officials and banking executives. Diplomatic circles describe Mr. Ashberg as the ‘Soviet banker’ who advanced large sums to Lenin and Trotsky in 1917. At the time of the revolution, Mr. Ashberg gave Trotsky money to form and equip the first unit of the Red Army.”

The Bolsheviks also received assistance from Armand Hammer, who still commutes back and forward between New York and Moscow to take care of his business interests in both communities. Hammer’s Occidental Oil Company is at the moment building a 1600 mile chemicals pipeline in southern Russia. He is also on such good terms with the Soviets that he personally arranges for Soviet art galleries to lend paintings to America.

Another American-based businessman to help out the Soviet economy is Michael Fribourg, who owns the massive Continental Grain Company. Together with the Louis Dreyfus Corporation, these Jewish speculators were able to buy up vast quantities of cheap American grain in 1972, sell it to the Soviets at a vast profit, and collect an export subsidy from the U.S. taxpayer.

In every other East European country, it is exactly the same story:

In Hungary a Communist revolution was staged in 1919, instigated by the Jew Bela Kun (Cohen). During the three month regime, the country was turned upside down in a reign of murder and terror. Here again, the government was composed almost entirely of Jews. And it was this factor which brought about the regime’s downfall, as the ordinary Hungarians detested Jewish dictatorship. Kun was deposed and fled to the Soviet Union, where he became chief of the secret police, the Cheka, in southern Russia.

It was not until 1945 that the Jews were able to regain control. Three Russian Jews were installed as the ruling triumvirate, Matyas Rakosi (Rosencranz), Erno Gero (Singer) and Zoltan Vas. Both Rakosi and Gero had been members of Kun’s bloody government.

In Germany, the Jews also tried to take over there in the chaos that followed the First World War. Aided by funds from the Soviet Ambassador Joffe, Rosa Luxemburg’s Spartacus Bund attempted to overthrow the government. The revolt was quelled and its leaders Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht executed.

The post-war dictator of Roumania, Anna Pauker, was the daughter of a Bucharest kosher butcher. For a time she earned her living teaching Hebrew. Her father and brother now live in Israel.

Although Tito was the only non-Jewish dictator behind the Iron Curtain in the late 1940s, he was tutored by the Jew Mosa Pijade. According to John Gunther in Behind the Iron Curtain, “He is Tito’s mentor… Whatever ideological structure Tito may have, he got it from the shrewd old man.”

Moscow’s puppet government in Czechoslovakia in the late 1940s was run by another Jew, Rudolph Slansky.

In Poland too, Jews occupied virtually every position of authority in the post-war Communist regime. Prominent among these were Minc, Skryesewski, Modzelewski and Berman. Jacob Berman gradually eclipsed the others until he became supreme dictator by himself. Also, Gomulka’s wife was a Jewess.

Even in China, Soviet Jews were at work helping Mao Tse Tung. High up in the Political Department of the Red Army in China were W. N. Levitschev and J. B. Gamarnik.

Share this:

Like this:

Quote

“The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.”
― Gloria Steinem
"The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived and dishonest--but the myth--persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
- John F. Kennedy (Commencement address, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, June 11, 1962)
The last of the very few decent Presidents America ever had